This Summer, the National Hockey League has been looking at ways to improve the game. From moving the faceoff circles to eliminating shootouts, NHL officials have targeted a few ideas that could be beneficial to the entire league.
After the NHL lockout, the shootout came into effect and many fans were excited about it, as expected. The shootout was something rarely seen in real-life, and with the number of superstars around the NHL, it sounded like a promising idea.
Now, five years later, the idea has not panned out as hoped. The shootout has even cost the New York Rangers to miss the playoffs, and allowed the Philadelphia Flyers to make it to the Stanley Cup Finals. The shootout’s intention was to have tea’s go all out during the five minute overtime, especially with the four on four. Instead, many have played conservative hockey, and over 15 percent of the games have went to a shootout, which is far too many.
Before all of this, the idea was to eliminate tie games, in which teams would each earn one point. Rather than abandoning the shootout completely, the NHL is more likely to alter the overtime session. In a couple years from now, the overtime may consist of two on two or three on three, something that is rarely seen.
Click below to continue reading:[url]
http://sabreshockeycentral.com/2010/08/22/is-eliminating-shootouts-the-answer/
no no no no no i love the shootout. its an exciting way to end a game.
Yes yes yes yes, get rid of it all. Shootouts belong at the All Star Game as entertainment. Overtime belongs in the playoffs. Tie games are fine in the regular season.
The shoot out is great entertainment and show cases the leagues top goalies against the leagues top shooter. If anything alter the 5 minute ot period with three on three or something. Can you imagine a three on three powerplay?? I personally like it just the way it is.
The shootout sucks! They should make it at least 7 players. 3 is AWFUL!
The shootout is exciting, but it really is a dumb way to end a team game. As I recall, it was the players that were asking for it...they wanted every game to end with a win; they didn't want ties anymore. I'd personally be fine going back to the "tie game". Going to things like "3 on 3" or "2 on 2" is just getting a little silly, in my mind.
im ok w/ ties and im ok w/ shootouts. please no 3v3 or 2v2. thats a much bigger ba$tardization of the game than a shootout could ever be.
Unfortuneatly they will never go back to ties. If they also made regulation worth 3 points for a win - skip the overtime (save it for the playoffs) - and go to a longer shootout worth 2 points for the win, 1 for the loss - since it is not really hockey - I would be ok!
I think the long talked about point restructure would be better with 3 for a win 2 for ot win 1 for a so win and 0 for a loss of any kind. The NHL avoids these though because they hate having "*" beside point totals every year.
I cannot see the NHL giving a team 0 points for losing a game in a shootout. I can see 3 points win in regulation. Then 2 for the win and 1 for the shootout loss. I still say remove OT and save it for the playoffs!
Also the shootout didn't prevent the Rangers from the playoffs. They played awful that game and in the OT they skated backwards with the puck behind their net on 3 different occasions. They were playing for the shootout. Also the Shootout got the Rangers of Jagr into the playoffs when they first implemented it! That team waited for the the shootout night after night.
ryan miller without a shootout.. i rele cant see that happening. its nice to see. it shows how amazing the goalies rele r 1 on 1
I am also a fan of the shoot out its a great way to bring the family together and watch the most exciting moments in sports!